Jammin', jammin', jammin' in the name of da' Lord...

Bold Pilot log entry #33

Time after time I run into a heated debate. When it comes to ECM in EVE, various arguments get flung around, people start to rage about it, some like it, some not. Well, I'm not going into those arguments. I don't care. What I do care about however, is the possibility, the complexity, and the experience. Basically, in the current EVE environment (yes, I dared say that even though it was months since I last logged in, bite me?) there are a few factors, that should be taken into consideration before looking at a valid career or specialization. Let's see.

• Does it require long enough training to have dedicated skill plans to it?
• Does it have enough impact on the game?
• Does it allow for complex line of experience, action, consequence?

So, how about the the training? That's a yes. You have a specific branch of ships and a bunch of support skills that add up to maybe about a year of training, as well as specialized fits and equipment. So training wise, people do appreciate a dedicated jammer pilot.

As impact goes, definitely yes. It is one of the most effective force multipliers in small to medium-scale combat.

As for action, consequence, experience, this is something that really should be worked on in my opinion. We here have a game mechanic that eliminates the targeted ships ability to target another ships. In other MMO terms, this is a disable. However, EVE is not other MMO. So, if I had to point out what exactly the problem with the current mechanic is, I'd point out the fact, that IF it succeeds on you, you get to stare at the screen for ten seconds and not be able to do anything about it. Other forms of electronic warfare have multiple countermeasures, resulting in a host of viable fits that eliminate one form or other. But what can you do if you don't want to get jammed? Sacrifice a slot. It MAYBE helps, but it is SURE to not give any other benefit. You probably already see where I'm going with this.You have specialized ships and fits for and against it, everything else gets jammed or gets shot down by more optimized ships.

Right now we have a mechanic that, in my opinion is not like the EVE we love. With an ECM ship, since its usually fragile, and is almost always a primary target, the pilot sits back, essentially away from the engagement, with either little, or extreme risk depending on the situation. People on the receiving end are also in a similar situation, they either cannot, or can fully contribute to a battle.

What could we then, do? Well I have a few ideas that I think work better when applied together, but some could be optional as well.

• Reduce ECM module optimal range in a way that all ship bonuses and support skills applied, it falls just outside the range of a tech II warp disruptor.
• Make it so, that within optimal, the ECM has a 100% chance of landing, and in the falloff range, chance of success should drastically drop, just as with tracking disruption.
• Successful ECM should not strip a ship's ability to target, just reduce the number of targets it can have, for example by two per appropriate skill level. More ECM on the same target, less free target slots. Alternatively, it could drop all targets, but initiating a lock should be possible right after the ECM lands.
• Furthermore, all active modules, that do not cause damage, repair local damage, add resists or capacitor locally could be interrupted by the ECM. This probably could have a major effect on logistics ships, but, for this to happen the jammer would have to be within optimal range.
• Probably adjust the specialized ECM ships to be a little more maneuverable, and to be able to take more damage before crumbling.
• Add the benefit of one more target slot for ECCM.

The desired result of this is to move the ECM ships inside the engagement, to have them trade greater risk of being shot at for the benefit of being able to reduce the effectiveness of the enemy fleet by a degree that's probably more in line with the other forms of electronic warfare. The additional benefit of disrupting module cycles (on some fits it is important to have your modules split in a good timing) could also be an interesting mechanic that could help spice things up a little more.

Sessym out.

The Necrorant Take One, or EVE, EVE, What have you become?

Bold Pilot Log, Entry # 32

But I have returned. And I know you better... wait that's another line... Ahem.
There are things that you never guess. You don't guess some people who barely know you will remember you. You don't guess that after stopping to not only post but to log in to your dusty old blog people still visit it. You don't guess that you can start over what you abandoned... But guess what? They do, and you do.

So I'm back in town. First I want to say thanks for those that really keep visiting everants.com. It's not a big thing, but it feels good to see you want more. And more is you going to get. EVE, this cruel mistress have changed much in the past months. Yet the core things remained the same. After a few month's break I found that I can still enjoy EVE. Just not on my own. It is the key thought in all of this - I have returned because I'm certain I'll have people to enjoy my gametime with. With this, EVERANTS will also be reborn. I will have a lot of topics to rant about I'm sure. There will probably be people joining me. Will you?

First off, there's yet again a controversial change in EVE, this time in the interface. With it, the community has a kind of love-hate relationship. We want it to be simpler, yet we don't want radical changes... Then what do we want? Well, certainly not exactly this, do we:


Actually, the idea of solving all inventory problems in one window is excellent. The core of the problem stems from the limitations in dimensions. You see, the inventory itself, be it in any game is a table of items. And that's already two dimensions taken. Your average monitor doesn't have an extra one. For that matter, the valid technologies are few and far between to show a third. So how do you resolve a problem of list of inventories? In most software, the multipage approach is used. Which is usually eligible, feels natural and is handy. Inventory in inventory problems are easily resolved by the tree view. What, then, you might ask, is the problem? What does this approach miss?

Well, in EVE, this too is a special things. In its current form, we miss cruicial information that the many windows approach gave us. The biggest setback is that we now can see the contents of only one container. Then we only can see the name of the container, and after looking carefully and no other information in a flash.

But there's a solution. I would, if I could, change the following (not in any particular order):

• Display shorter names for containers. For example, Station, Ships, ETC. Also, if I named a container I probably did so because I wanted to see its name, and nothing else. So exile the descrption (Large Secure Container) to the back of the line.
• Implement horizontal slidebars everywhere already...
• Instead of displaying only the dropdown arrows, draw lines that show clearly where the container belongs.
• It should be possible to see multiple containers' contents and capacity information at once. Suddenly, Dividers! Thousands of them! Okay, maybe a limit of sixteen will be enough? Just buplicate the right-side part of the current window with vertical sorting.
• Add checkboxes in front of the containers, so we can easily select which ones we want to always see. This information should be saved, so when a container becomes inaccessible, it disappears from the list, but when it comes back, the divider comes back, too.

The speed improvement for the Unified Inventory is so visible. It could do so much more for the user than it currently does. It would be amazing.

Sessym out.